Howdy all -
Is the "best" way to get rawhide to try to install directly off the tree at ftp://[my_favorite_mirror]/fedora/core/development/i386/, or to install FC3 and then point my yum files at the development tree? I am planning on starting with a blank drive.
Thanks! Thomas
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:30:19 -0600, Thomas Cameron thomas.cameron@camerontech.com wrote:
Howdy all -
Is the "best" way to get rawhide to try to install directly off the tree at ftp://[my_favorite_mirror]/fedora/core/development/i386/,
boot.iso is provided in images/ directory in the tree. burn the boot.iso do a network install.
Depending on the internal consistency of the rawhide tree doing a direct install may not work. Expect problems, don't be shocked if the installer sees an unresolvable dependancy.
-jef
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Spaleta" jspaleta@gmail.com To: "For testers of Fedora Core development releases" fedora-test-list@redhat.com Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:00 AM Subject: Re: "Best" way to do a fresh install of rawhide?
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:30:19 -0600, Thomas Cameron thomas.cameron@camerontech.com wrote:
Howdy all -
Is the "best" way to get rawhide to try to install directly off the tree at ftp://[my_favorite_mirror]/fedora/core/development/i386/,
boot.iso is provided in images/ directory in the tree. burn the boot.iso do a network install.
Yeah, that's what I was talking about - boot off of it but then point it to the mirror to install over ftp.
Depending on the internal consistency of the rawhide tree doing a direct install may not work. Expect problems, don't be shocked if the installer sees an unresolvable dependancy.
OK, so is this what the dev team *wants* - i.e. does it make sense to even try it this way to find bugs? Or is it more desireable to start with a stable install (FC3) and then yum up to rawhide? Do you see what I mean? If I'm going to file bugs against weird behavior, I want to make sure they are realistic bugs.
Thomas
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:10:55 -0600, Thomas Cameron thomas.cameron@camerontech.com wrote:
OK, so is this what the dev team *wants* - i.e. does it make sense to even try it this way to find bugs? Or is it more desireable to start with a stable install (FC3) and then yum up to rawhide? Do you see what I mean? If I'm going to file bugs against weird behavior, I want to make sure they are realistic bugs.
Desirable? I'm sure a lot of testers find starting with an fc3 install desireable... because they don't like testing the installer. But in the final analysis yum isn't officially (whatever that means) recommended as a means to go from one release to the next. You have to ask yourself what you think is more important for you to do as a tester.
the installer is worth testing... but depending on the day you try the install...you might have a problem simply because rawhide has become inconsistent. It happens.. its the nature of rawhide. From day to day as new crap enters into the rawhide tree dependancy problems might creep in. Even testers using yum to selectively grab rawhide packages see it sometimes and end-up using excludes to get around the small set of broken deps. Every day is a new adventure. dep problems which prevent the installer from working as expected are valid filable issues.
It helps to review recent posts on test-list. Invariably someone will use yum... see a dep problem and mention it (or as often demand instructions on how to fix it). When you see recent discussion like this on the lists you can probably expect the install from rawhide attempt to be extra "fun." Depending on the packages that are having a problem in rawhide and the type of install you do you may or may not have a problem installing. The key thing is approach everything you do with the rawhide tree expecting to have a problem... and to be disappointed when things go well.
-jef
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:10:55 -0600, Thomas Cameron
try it this way to find bugs? Or is it more desireable to start with a stable install (FC3) and then yum up to rawhide? Do you see what I mean? If I'm going to file bugs against weird behavior, I want to make sure they are realistic bugs.
Thomas
FYI, I have not been able to install using the boot.iso and rawhide the last 3-4 days. I am getting python errors from anaconda when it tries to organize the lvm partitions. 'global name math not defined.' You may want to skip lvm or wait a few days or try the fc3 upgrade.
----- Original Message ----- From: "matt whiteley" mattwhiteley@gmail.com
FYI, I have not been able to install using the boot.iso and rawhide the last 3-4 days. I am getting python errors from anaconda when it tries to organize the lvm partitions. 'global name math not defined.' You may want to skip lvm or wait a few days or try the fc3 upgrade.
-- matt whiteley mattwhiteley@gmail.com
OK, looks like I will do a vanilla install of FC3 and then point yum to rawhide.
Thanks for all who responded!
TC
On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 09:31 -0800, matt whiteley wrote:
FYI, I have not been able to install using the boot.iso and rawhide the last 3-4 days. I am getting python errors from anaconda when it tries to organize the lvm partitions. 'global name math not defined.' You may want to skip lvm or wait a few days or try the fc3 upgrade.
It tends to be helpful when you hit things like this to look in bugzilla for bugs filed against anaconda and if it hasn't been filed, to actually file it.
I fixed this one earlier this morning, though, when I hit it :-)
Jeremy